Crisis resource management (CRM) is a team-training program that teaches nontechnical skills such as: collaboration, communication, task management, teamwork, and leadership. The purpose of this study was to evaluate improvement in the nontechnical skills of a multidisciplinary team of pediatric residents, anesthesiology residents and pediatric nurses following participation in the CRM educational program. Self-efficacy theory guided the teaching method used in the CRM program. The Collaboration and Satisfaction about Care Decisions instrument and the Anesthetists' Nontechnical Skills System served as outcome measures. Seven multidisciplinary groups were studied with a total of 40 subjects. A significant increase was found in posttest scores for perceived collaboration and satisfaction with care and in numerical ratings of observed team skills following the CRM program. The results suggest multidisciplinary team participation in the CRM program increased perceived team collaboration, satisfaction with care, and observed teamwork skills.
"Simulations are used to learn and develop high-level skills and knowledge needed in specific domains, like caring for a trauma patient (Rosqvist & Lauritsalo, 2013). They are found to be beneficial in learning nursing practices, especially clinical skills and bridging classroom and clinical learning (Darcy Mahoney et al., 2013) and so called non-technical skills such as communication, decision-making, leadership and team work (Jankouskas et al., 2007). Cant and Cooper (2010) reviewed 12 studies and found out that six had demonstrated positive effects on learning (e.g., gaining knowledge and self-confidence and learning critical thinking) whereas six studies did not show effects. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Objective: Human factors and teamwork are major contributors to sentinel events. A major limitation to improving human factors and teamwork is the paucity of objective validated measurement tools. Our goal was to develop a brief tool that could be used to objectively evaluate teamwork in the field during short clinical team simulations and in everyday clinical care.
Study Design: A pilot validation study. Standardized videos were created demonstrating poor, average, and excellent teamwork among an obstetric team in a common clinical scenario (shoulder dystocia). Three evaluators all trained in Crew Resource Management, and unaware of assigned teamwork level, independently reviewed videos and evaluated teamwork using the Clinical Teamwork Scale (CTS). Statistical analysis included calculation of the Kappa statistic and Kendall coefficient to evaluate agreement and score concordance among raters, and Interclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) to evaluate interrater reliability. The reliability of the tool was further evaluated by estimating the variance of each component of the tool based on generalizability theory.
Results: There was substantial agreement (Kappa 0.78) and score concordance (Kendall coefficient 0.95) among raters, and excellent interrater reliability (interclass correlation coefficient 0.98). The highest percentage of variance in scores among raters was because of rater/item interaction.
Conclusion: The CTS was developed to efficiently measure key clinical teamwork skills during simulation exercises and in everyday clinical care. It contains 15 questions in 5 clinical teamwork domains (communication, situational awareness, decision-making, role responsibility, and patient friendliness). It is easy to use and has construct validity with median ratings consistently corresponding with the intended teamwork level. The CTS is a brief, straightforward, valid, reliable, and easy-to-use tool to measure key factors in teamwork in simulated and clinical settings.
Simulation in healthcare: journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare 12/2007; 3(4):217-223. DOI:10.1097/SIH.0b013e31816fdd0a · 1.48 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.